Issue - decisions

The Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager summarising suggested needs and project ideas for new or improved local facilities arising from the recent consultation workshop in the Area. The report also assessed those projects in terms of eligibility for developer contributions funding and deliverabilityin the short-term (by the end of March 2014). Councillor Kightley reported that a number of representations had been received from Residents Associations and from Councillor Hipkin in Castle Ward, broadly in support of the range of projects under consideration.

 

Recommendation 2.2 of the Officer’s report was amended to read:

To identify which of the proposals that are deliverable in the short-term to prioritise for delivery, subject to project appraisal and identification of appropriate funding for any associated revenue and maintenance costs.

 

Members discussed the proposal for improvements to pathways on Jesus Green and Midsummer Common (longer-term project, M05). It was suggested that this project be reported to the Community Services Scrutiny Committee as a project of strategic/city-wide importance, alongside the proposal to drain Jesus Green (M06). Councillor Cantrill stated that some of the paths are classified as highways and therefore, are County Council responsibility.  County Councillor Whitebread agreed to investigate County Council funding and would report back to the next meeting. Members agreed to ask officers to highlight the importance attached to this project by the Area Committee as part of the prioritisation of the city/county council joint Cycleways Programme.

 

Action

 

Councillor Bick reminded the Committee that future, additional funding could not be guaranteed. Funding short-term projects now could result in insufficient funding for longer-term projects, which might be of greater benefit to the local community.

 

Members discussed the merits of proposals to improve two play areas in Newnham (N18 and N19). Residents of Gough Way had highlighted a deficit of play equipment at Penarth Place play area. However, Cockcroft Place play area also had a need for equipment as many properties in the area lacked gardens. Members suggested that it might be harder to design something suitable for Cockcroft Place due to the limited space and the level of traffic in the area caused by the nearby school and nursery. Members agreed that the two play areas served different needs and that both had merit.

 

Councillor Kightley reported that Windsor Road Residents Association, The Friends of Histon Road Recreation Ground and Richmond Road Residents' Association had emailed to express satisfaction with the process to date.

 

The proposal to improve the entrances to Histon Road Recreation Ground (C04) were discussed. Members expressed a desire to do something more than repair and repaint the existing gates – the report had highlighted that the incorporation of public art in this project could extend the time needed for project delivery. The successful combined EIP and Public Art project recently delivered in Wulstan Way (South Area) was sited as an approach the Committee may wish to consider. The committee suggested that local artists be used for any public art element of the project.

 

Members made the following points:

              i.      Members asked for more information on outdoor table tennis tables and were directed to the existing tables at the Abbey Pool play area. An external funding bid has been made, so alternative funding might be available for this project.

            ii.      Strategic projects benefiting more than one area of the city would be considered at the January Community Services Committee for city-wide funding.

          iii.      The costing for improved access to Midsummer Common orchard (M03) appeared to be over-stated and a clearer estimate would be investigated.

 

Members were reminded that, with the exception of applications for grant applications to other organisations which were ready to be processed, the Area Committee would need to limit their short-term priorities to three projects for delivery by the end of March 2014. Recognising that the other area committees would also be identifying their own short-term project priorities as well, it was important to make sure that the overall project delivery programme was realistic and achievable in the context of organisational capacity.

 

Members agreed that, should it be possible to deliver the priority projects sooner than March 2014, their next priority would be to consider one or both of the improvements to the play areas at Penarth Place and Cockcroft Place (N18 and N19).

 

All the projects being prioritised will be subject to project appraisal and local consultation in order to develop the details of the projects.

 

Resolved to;

 

              i.      Note the summary of all consultation feedback arising from the West/Central Area workshop and related emails

 

            ii.      Agree (on a show of hands) the following proposals that were deliverable in the short-term to prioritise for delivery, subject to project appraisal and identification of appropriate funding for any associated revenue and maintenance costs.

 

A01   Seats and benches in parks (Area-wide)

 

C04  Improved entrances to Histon Road Recreation Ground (Castle)

         

M03  Improved access to Midsummer Common orchard (Market)

 

In addition, the following project was agreed unanimously

 

M01  Community meeting room at Centre 33 (Market), as a community facilities grant which could be processed quickly.

 

          iii.      Agree Table 2 of the Officer’s report, with the addition of the eligible components of item M05 (Jesus Green and Midsummer Common pathways) as city-wide ideas from West Central Area Committee as possible uses of city-wide developer contributions funding to be reported to the Community Services Scrutiny Committee in January 2013. Top priority projects were agreed to be M05 and M06.